Comparison of clinician injury severity ratings with Abbreviated Injury Scale designations for thoracic injuries

OBJECTIVES: The utility of the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) for injury benchmarking and epidemiologic research depends on accurate injury severity designations. The objective of this study was to assess whether aggregated independent clinician assessments of injury severity differ from the official consensus-based AIS severity designations, focusing on common thoracic injuries. METHODS: Twenty-one thoracic injuries were selected, including rib fractures, sternal fractures, pneumothorax, and hemothorax. Radiographic images from patients with these injuries were obtained from the Crash Injury Research and Engineering Network (CIREN) database for 2017-2023. Clinicians were recruited to participate in an anonymous survey and independently rated each injury across four domains: threat to life, time to recovery, long-term morbidity, and overall injury severity. Overall severity ratings were recorded on an ordinal scale (1-6) anchored to AIS severity levels for injuries in other body regions. Agreement between aggregated clinician ratings and official AIS consensus severity designations was evaluated using ordinal regression. RESULTS: There were 18 physicians who completed the survey, most of whom were trauma surgeons practicing at Level I trauma centers. Overall severity ratings exactly matched the AIS designation in 43% of responses, and 89% were within one severity level. Greater years of clinical practice and training in trauma surgery or emergency medicine were associated with higher agreement with AIS designations. Clinician-assigned overall severity ratings tended to be lower than AIS designations for pneumothorax and hemothorax at higher severity levels. Among the surveyed domains, perceived threat to life contributed most strongly to overall severity ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Aggregated clinician assessments of injury severity generally aligned with AIS severity levels but frequently rated certain thoracic injuries as less severe at higher AIS levels. These findings suggest that clinician perceptions of severity may differ from consensus-based AIS designations, particularly for pneumothorax and hemothorax.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Traffic Injury Prevention
Published
2026-08-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2026.2709032
Primary Topic
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of clinician injury severity ratings with Abbreviated Injury Scale designations for thoracic injuries

Thomas Hartka, M. NOORBAKHSH, George Glass, Pavel Chernyavskiy et al.
Traffic Injury Prevention
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
article

Comparison of clinician injury severity ratings with Abbreviated Injury Scale designations for thoracic injuries

Thomas Hartka, M. NOORBAKHSH, George Glass, Pavel Chernyavskiy, A. Simpson, C. G. Shaw
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The utility of the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) for injury benchmarking and epidemiologic research depends on accurate injury severity designations. The objective of this study was to assess whether aggregated independent clinician assessments of injury severity differ from the official consensus-based AIS severity designations, focusing on common thoracic injuries. METHODS: Twenty-one thoracic injuries were selected, including rib fractures, sternal fractures, pneumothorax, and hemothorax. Radiographic images from patients with these injuries were obtained from the Crash Injury Research and Engineering Network (CIREN) database for 2017-2023. Clinicians were recruited to participate in an anonymous survey and independently rated each injury across four domains: threat to life, time to recovery, long-term morbidity, and overall injury severity. Overall severity ratings were recorded on an ordinal scale (1-6) anchored to AIS severity levels for injuries in other body regions. Agreement between aggregated clinician ratings and official AIS consensus severity designations was evaluated using ordinal regression. RESULTS: There were 18 physicians who completed the survey, most of whom were trauma surgeons practicing at Level I trauma centers. Overall severity ratings exactly matched the AIS designation in 43% of responses, and 89% were within one severity level. Greater years of clinical practice and training in trauma surgery or emergency medicine were associated with higher agreement with AIS designations. Clinician-assigned overall severity ratings tended to be lower than AIS designations for pneumothorax and hemothorax at higher severity levels. Among the surveyed domains, perceived threat to life contributed most strongly to overall severity ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Aggregated clinician assessments of injury severity generally aligned with AIS severity levels but frequently rated certain thoracic injuries as less severe at higher AIS levels. These findings suggest that clinician perceptions of severity may differ from consensus-based AIS designations, particularly for pneumothorax and hemothorax.

Traffic Injury Prevention
VA Office of Research and Development (US), University of Virginia (US)
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.